Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD 64 Laptop worth waiting for???

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 27, 2004 1:06:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Hey, i'm going to buy a laptop. I want to get an HP with a 17inch
brightview
screen. Basically a desktop replacement. I'm trying to decide between
a
Pentium 4 with hyperthreading which is available now OR an AMD 64
processor. Unfortunately they don't yet make them with AMD 64
processors
and 17 in screens. Is the AMD 64 a big enough jump in performance that
it warrants waiting for? I play some games, but i'm not a hardcore
gamer
or anything like that. I tend to keep computers for about 2 years and
then sell them to my parents and buy something new. I'd appreciate any
advice. My main concern with buying a P4 hyperthread is that it might
become obsolet as the newer AMD 64 processors come online.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 27, 2004 11:05:22 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"aladin" <arouth@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:2a99af5e.0408262006.686c2f7b@posting.google.com...
> Hey, i'm going to buy a laptop. I want to get an HP with a 17inch
> brightview
> screen. Basically a desktop replacement. I'm trying to decide between
> a
> Pentium 4 with hyperthreading which is available now OR an AMD 64
> processor. Unfortunately they don't yet make them with AMD 64
> processors
> and 17 in screens. Is the AMD 64 a big enough jump in performance that
> it warrants waiting for? I play some games, but i'm not a hardcore
> gamer
> or anything like that. I tend to keep computers for about 2 years and
> then sell them to my parents and buy something new. I'd appreciate any
> advice. My main concern with buying a P4 hyperthread is that it might
> become obsolet as the newer AMD 64 processors come online.

The P4 is already obsolet.

Even the old Pentium-M Banias 1.6 GHz is faster
than this fail construction P4

http://notebook.pege.org/benchmarks/content-creation-be...

Against a Pentium-M Dothan?

sorry not tested until now, but I expect a total disaster
for this fail construction P4

Also both, P4 and AMD 64 are not mobile CPUs
so there will never be latops with this.

only so called Pseudo "Laptops"


--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 27, 2004 2:16:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Roland Mösl" <founder@pege.org> wrote in message
news:412ec114$0$33116$91cee783@newsreader01.highway.telekom.at...
| "aladin" <arouth@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| news:2a99af5e.0408262006.686c2f7b@posting.google.com...
|
| Also both, P4 and AMD 64 are not mobile CPUs
| so there will never be latops with this.
|

Hmm, that's funny. I have a mobile A64 that I am posting this message from.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 27, 2004 6:29:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

AMD 64, don't have to think 2 times.


"aladin" <arouth@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2a99af5e.0408262006.686c2f7b@posting.google.com...
> Hey, i'm going to buy a laptop. I want to get an HP with a 17inch
> brightview
> screen. Basically a desktop replacement. I'm trying to decide between
> a
> Pentium 4 with hyperthreading which is available now OR an AMD 64
> processor. Unfortunately they don't yet make them with AMD 64
> processors
> and 17 in screens. Is the AMD 64 a big enough jump in performance that
> it warrants waiting for? I play some games, but i'm not a hardcore
> gamer
> or anything like that. I tend to keep computers for about 2 years and
> then sell them to my parents and buy something new. I'd appreciate any
> advice. My main concern with buying a P4 hyperthread is that it might
> become obsolet as the newer AMD 64 processors come online.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 28, 2004 3:40:39 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Roland Mösl wrote:

> The P4 is already obsolet.
>
> Even the old Pentium-M Banias 1.6 GHz is faster
> than this fail construction P4
>
> http://notebook.pege.org/benchmarks/content-creation-be...

Well, don't care to much to Mr Moesl as he also spreads his "wisdom" in the
german notebook group. He thinks the only valid benchmark is his "content
creation benchmark" which says about zero on the real-world performance on
heavy applications or even games. He only believes that only a notebook with
Pentium-M is a "true notebook", despite the fact that other people might
have different requirements. When reading his web site it should be clear
what's going on in his mind. He currently has the status of the "group
clown" in de.comp.sys.notebooks...

A Pentium-M 1.6 is already as fast as a Pentium4 2.5GHz, with the P4 in
multimedia applications and games being a bit faster. The P-M is a very nice
CPU, but of course not the only alternative available in notebooks. He isn't
bright enough to understand this, so I'd recommend to to the same like
people do in the German group: ignore him...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 29, 2004 4:29:48 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> Operating System Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Home Edition
> Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3.40 GHz w/HT Technology
> Display 17.0" WVA WSXGA+ BrightView (1680x1050)
> Graphics Card 128MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(TM) FX Go5700
> Memory 1.0GB DDR SDRAM (2x512MB)
> Hard Drive 80 GB 5400 RPM Hard Drive
> Primary CD/DVD Drive 2X DVD+RW/R & CD-RW Combo Drive
> Networking 54g(TM) 802.11b/g WLAN w/ 125HSM/SpeedBooster(TM)
> Productivity Software Microsoft(R) Works/Money
> Primary Battery 12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
> HP extended service plans 2-year HP Express Repair extended service
> plan
>
This is the finest LCD I have ever seen on a laptop - although the shiney
finish is unfortunate. I may get one of these too.

Very nice machine.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 29, 2004 8:13:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> | Also both, P4 and AMD 64 are not mobile CPUs
> | so there will never be latops with this.
> |
>
> Hmm, that's funny. I have a mobile A64 that I am posting this message
from.

Is something "bio", because the farmer uses 5% less fertilizer?

What AMD prints on the chip is a joke,
a marketing hype for the technical uniformed people.

There should be no CPU signed as mobile with more
than 30W maximum power usage.

By far, this does the AMD not meet


--
Roland Mösl - http://www.pege.org - http://notebook.pege.org
http://wds-internetwerbung.com Web Design startet an der Suchmaschine
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 29, 2004 8:13:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Roland Mösl" <founder@pege.org> wrote in message
news:4131e565$0$16084$91cee783@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at...
|> | Also both, P4 and AMD 64 are not mobile CPUs
| > | so there will never be latops with this.
| > |
| >
| > Hmm, that's funny. I have a mobile A64 that I am posting this message
| from.
|
| Is something "bio", because the farmer uses 5% less fertilizer?
|
| What AMD prints on the chip is a joke,
| a marketing hype for the technical uniformed people.
|
| There should be no CPU signed as mobile with more
| than 30W maximum power usage.
|
| By far, this does the AMD not meet
|

If you don't consider it mobile, I guess that's your choice. Noce way of
picking 30W as your standard since this chip is rated at 35W ;)  .
"Technically uninformed" describes you quite well.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 29, 2004 8:15:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> > The P4 is already obsolet.
> >
> > Even the old Pentium-M Banias 1.6 GHz is faster
> > than this fail construction P4
> >
> > http://notebook.pege.org/benchmarks/content-creation-be...
>
> Well, don't care to much to Mr Moesl as he also spreads his "wisdom" in
the
> german notebook group. He thinks the only valid benchmark is his "content
> creation benchmark" which says about zero on the real-world performance

This is real world performance in
opposit to artificial benchmarks small enough to run even
in the 128 kb cache of a Celeron

> A Pentium-M 1.6 is already as fast as a Pentium4 2.5GHz, with the P4

Maybe with some applicatios, with other applications,
a Pentium-M 1.6 GHz is as fast as a P4 with 3.2 GHz



--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 29, 2004 8:16:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> Operating System Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Home Edition
> Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3.40 GHz w/HT Technology

100 Watt CPU in a notebook.

Somebody has to be a real masochist to
buy a Pseudo "Notebook" like this


--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 12:05:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Roland Mösl wrote:

>> Well, don't care to much to Mr Moesl as he also spreads his "wisdom"
>> in the german notebook group. He thinks the only valid benchmark is
>> his "content creation benchmark" which says about zero on the
>> real-world performance
>
> This is real world performance in
> opposit to artificial benchmarks small enough to run even
> in the 128 kb cache of a Celeron

That's nonsense, like usual from You. Your "content creation benchmark" uses
undefined applications in an undefined configuration on notebooks with an
undefined system installation. You obviously have no clue about testing, but
that should be clear to everyone that reads what You post and what You write
on Your website...

I know You assume everyone has the same user profile like You, but that's
not true. There is life outside austria, and there are people that use
computers for other things than glueing some mediocre websites together.

>> A Pentium-M 1.6 is already as fast as a Pentium4 2.5GHz, with the P4
>
> Maybe with some applicatios, with other applications,
> a Pentium-M 1.6 GHz is as fast as a P4 with 3.2 GHz

That's BS again. I'd recommend that You go and try to get at least some
basic clue about computers, but I know from Your behave in the german
notebook group that this is useless...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 12:28:40 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

aladin wrote:

> Benjamin, thanks for the advice. I like the design of HP and I love
> there 17 inch brightview screen. Here are the specs. How well do you
> think this will hold up technology wise?

As well as everything other that You can buy for money today: in six month
it's barely midrange ;-)

As I said before, don't worry that much if the system is still current in 2
years. You simply _can't_ buy anything today that is still top-end in more
than six month from now. But then You should ask Yourself if You want the
system for playing/working or to show off for Your friends...

> I like to keep my computers
> for 2 years.

No problem, I do the same (I'm still working with a Dual Xeon 2GHz system
from HP, and it suits my need even for the latest games)...

> Also, you said that the amd would have a bigger address
> space. Ummm....what does that mean:) 

It's simple. Pentium4 and Athlon are 32bit CPUs. That means they can address
up to 4GB of memory. This range doesn't only cover physical memory (RAM) but
also logical memory (swap/paging space). 64Bit CPUs like the Athlon64,
Operton, P4 and XEON EM64T or Itanium can address much more (theoretical
limit is ~18 Billion GB, however modern 64Bit CPUs are limited to much lower
values).

The use for the average home user is quite limited. Only big database server
and other highend tasks require that much memory. It won't help You with
Office, with web browsing, email, news, with video coding, or with games. It
will for sure take several years until the average PC really _needs_ more
than 4GB of memory, and at that time everything You buy today will be
obsolete for long.

So I wouldn't care that much for the 64bit hype, it's more marketing than
something really new. 64bit is already quite common in the professional area
for over 7 years now...

> Also, do you have any idea why
> they don't make 17 laptops with AMD processors?

I'm sure they will come. But bear in mind that 17" notebooks are a somewhat
niche which is relative small and doesn't attract that much customers,
simply because of the (for a mobile computer unsuitable) size and power
requirements of the display...

BTW: if You buy HP You should be aware that there are two product lines. The
pavilions are home products while the nc/nw/nr series are business product,
with the latter offering a better customer service...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 1:44:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> > Maybe with some applicatios, with other applications,
> > a Pentium-M 1.6 GHz is as fast as a P4 with 3.2 GHz
>
> That's BS again. I'd recommend that You go and try to get at least some
> basic clue about computers,

I have more than enough konwledge about computers

Therefor, I prefer the modern Pentium-M against
the fail construction P4


--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 2:00:49 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Benjamin

You should ask Yourself if You want the
> system for playing/working or to show off for Your friends...

Lol, thats funny, well chicks don't dig laptops, so i'm not gonna try
to show off for my friends:) 

Thanks for the advice, you seem to really know what your talking
about. Basically, i've decided to get a really powerful laptop to
replace my desktop. I'll take it on trips, but i'm not planning to be
overly mobile with it. I mean i'll just keep it in my hotel room
plugged in. HP also offers a really cool expansion base that you can
just insert your laptop into.

I've thought up a couple more questions for you if you don't mind.
Thanks again for the info.

1. Would you recomend XP media center? Watching and recording TV...my
initial take is that its a show me the money type thing.

2. You say that technology is going to be out of date in 6 months
anyway. I bought a Dell 2.55 pentium 4 2 years ago and it still seems
pretty modern. Am I missing something?
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 2:08:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Roland Mösl wrote:

> I have more than enough konwledge about computers

You speaking of "knowledge" is the same like a blind man speaking of
colors...

I think Your reputation here and in de.comp.sys.notebooks says a lot of Your
"competence". I can't think of anyone other that showed that much lack of
any understanding of computers like You...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 11:12:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> > I have more than enough konwledge about computers
>
> You speaking of "knowledge" is the same like a blind man speaking of
> colors...
>
> I think Your reputation here and in de.comp.sys.notebooks says a lot of
Your
> "competence". I can't think of anyone other that showed that much lack of
> any understanding of computers like You...

Your understanding of computers is,
that they are allowed to make much noise
disturbing the human user.

You are not able to understand, that only
the combination of human and machine
brings usefull work done.

When a noisy Pseuco "Notebook" disturbs
the human user, it could be even twice as
fast at certain benchmarks, the silent
machine would still be more productive
together with the human.

But for luck, in real world applications
the Pentium-M Dothan is highly superior
against the ancient fail construction P4

so nobody has to think about noise or
performancd, the Dothan has both


--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 6:32:54 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

aladin wrote:

> Lol, thats funny, well chicks don't dig laptops, so i'm not gonna try
> to show off for my friends:) 

You would be surprised what people sometimes buy things for ;-)

> Thanks for the advice, you seem to really know what your talking
> about.

Thanks. But that's what we are here...

> Basically, i've decided to get a really powerful laptop to
> replace my desktop. I'll take it on trips, but i'm not planning to be
> overly mobile with it. I mean i'll just keep it in my hotel room
> plugged in.

I understand. So battery runtime is not that important for You, as is a
small size and a very light weight.

> 1. Would you recomend XP media center? Watching and recording TV...my
> initial take is that its a show me the money type thing.

Well, I can't say much to XP MCE since I never had contact with it. From
what I have read it has some nice features, but these also can be added to a
generic XP with 3rd party tools (from which most are freeware).

If You don't need the features I'd go with a generic XP (even Home Edition
should do it well). But the OS should already come with the laptop, so if
You don't really need MCE I wouldn't care that much to it.

> 2. You say that technology is going to be out of date in 6 months
> anyway. I bought a Dell 2.55 pentium 4 2 years ago and it still seems
> pretty modern. Am I missing something?

Well, 2 years ago You had the absolute highend. Today, 2.55GHz is going to
be the lower midrange or upper entry level. I'm sure You paid a lot of money
for it, and now look how much such a system costs today...

That doesn't mean it's old and slow, but every computer goes trough a
continuously way of being "degraded". What's highend today is only average
tomorrow and outdated next week (exagerated of course). You for sure still
can play the latest games with this computer, as I can do with my old HP
x4000 2GHz system...

Don't overrate the technology changes or what's new and cool, and always
remember that the biggest part of any new technology s just marketing.
Marketing, that is looking for early adopters willing to pay a premium price
for the latest. Buy something that suits You today, and it will serve You
well even tomorrow...

Benjamin

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 30, 2004 9:18:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Roland Mösl" <founder@pege.org> wrote in message
news:4132b73c$0$26346$91cee783@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at...
|> > I have more than enough konwledge about computers
| >
| > You speaking of "knowledge" is the same like a blind man speaking of
| > colors...
| >
| > I think Your reputation here and in de.comp.sys.notebooks says a lot of
| Your
| > "competence". I can't think of anyone other that showed that much lack
of
| > any understanding of computers like You...
|
| Your understanding of computers is,
| that they are allowed to make much noise
| disturbing the human user.
|
| You are not able to understand, that only
| the combination of human and machine
| brings usefull work done.
|
| When a noisy Pseuco "Notebook" disturbs
| the human user, it could be even twice as
| fast at certain benchmarks, the silent
| machine would still be more productive
| together with the human.
|
| But for luck, in real world applications
| the Pentium-M Dothan is highly superior
| against the ancient fail construction P4
|
| so nobody has to think about noise or
| performancd, the Dothan has both
|
|

I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 1:27:14 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Hey Benjamin, thanks again for the advice, its been REALLY helpful. I
took the plunge and bought just now. I decided not to worry about the
P4 vs AMD. I bought a 3.2 P4 with hyperthreading. I decided against
the 3.4 b/c it was $150 dollars more. Its a rip off if you think about
it, i mean its only .2 faster. It should be here in about 2 weeks, so
it will be fun to set up. Anyway, here are the specs.

Operating System Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Home Edition
Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3.20 GHz w/HT Technology
Display 17.0" WVA WSXGA+ BrightView (1680x1050)
Graphics Card 128MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(TM) FX Go5700
Memory 1.0GB DDR SDRAM (2x512MB)
Hard Drive 80 GB 5400 RPM Hard Drive
Primary CD/DVD Drive 2X DVD+RW/R & CD-RW Combo Drive
Networking 54g(TM) 802.11b/g WLAN w/ 125HSM/SpeedBooster(TM)
Productivity Software Microsoft(R) Works/Money
Primary Battery 12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
HP extended service plans 2-year HP Express Repair extended service
plan
Docking Solutions HP notebook expansion base for Pavilion
zd7000/zx5000/zv5000 & Presario R3000 series notebooks
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 4:55:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran wrote:

> I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.

As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 4:55:08 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Jason Cothran wrote:
|
| > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
|
| As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
|

LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that computer
illiterate.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 5:26:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

I've been looking to get a laptop as a desktop replacement as well, so I've
been lurking on this site for a few weeks now. Mostly looking to play games,
network with my home PC, surf the web in bed (sorry for the visual), that
kind of thing. I noticed that Prostargaming.com offers an AMD 64 with a 17"
screen (their 4764 model). The specs seem pretty good, and the price is
competive. Anyone have any experience with either the machine or the
company?

Also, I saw somebenchmarks over at firing squad (or maybe sharky extreme)
recenly comparing the AMD 64 to the P4 3.4 and 3.2. Seems the AMD was a
little faster, and a bit less expensive.

Lastly, anyone have a sense for the difference between the ATI 9600, 9700,
and 9800? They all have 128 M of ram, but not sure the differences.

Jitz

"Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:2pelj6FihsghU2@uni-berlin.de...
> aladin wrote:
>
> > Benjamin, thanks for the advice. I like the design of HP and I love
> > there 17 inch brightview screen. Here are the specs. How well do you
> > think this will hold up technology wise?
>
> As well as everything other that You can buy for money today: in six month
> it's barely midrange ;-)
>
> As I said before, don't worry that much if the system is still current in
2
> years. You simply _can't_ buy anything today that is still top-end in more
> than six month from now. But then You should ask Yourself if You want the
> system for playing/working or to show off for Your friends...
>
> > I like to keep my computers
> > for 2 years.
>
> No problem, I do the same (I'm still working with a Dual Xeon 2GHz system
> from HP, and it suits my need even for the latest games)...
>
> > Also, you said that the amd would have a bigger address
> > space. Ummm....what does that mean:) 
>
> It's simple. Pentium4 and Athlon are 32bit CPUs. That means they can
address
> up to 4GB of memory. This range doesn't only cover physical memory (RAM)
but
> also logical memory (swap/paging space). 64Bit CPUs like the Athlon64,
> Operton, P4 and XEON EM64T or Itanium can address much more (theoretical
> limit is ~18 Billion GB, however modern 64Bit CPUs are limited to much
lower
> values).
>
> The use for the average home user is quite limited. Only big database
server
> and other highend tasks require that much memory. It won't help You with
> Office, with web browsing, email, news, with video coding, or with games.
It
> will for sure take several years until the average PC really _needs_ more
> than 4GB of memory, and at that time everything You buy today will be
> obsolete for long.
>
> So I wouldn't care that much for the 64bit hype, it's more marketing than
> something really new. 64bit is already quite common in the professional
area
> for over 7 years now...
>
> > Also, do you have any idea why
> > they don't make 17 laptops with AMD processors?
>
> I'm sure they will come. But bear in mind that 17" notebooks are a
somewhat
> niche which is relative small and doesn't attract that much customers,
> simply because of the (for a mobile computer unsuitable) size and power
> requirements of the display...
>
> BTW: if You buy HP You should be aware that there are two product lines.
The
> pavilions are home products while the nc/nw/nr series are business
product,
> with the latter offering a better customer service...
>
> Benjamin
>
>
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 7:16:23 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
> | Jason Cothran wrote:
> |
> | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
> |
> | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
> |
>
> LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that computer
> illiterate.

He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
you're so "literate"!

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 7:16:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
| > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
| > | Jason Cothran wrote:
| > |
| > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
| > |
| > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
| > |
| >
| > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that
computer
| > illiterate.
|
| He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
| you're so "literate"!
|

Ok, by simply stating I prefer my A64, I am trying to write a benchmark
suite? Weird.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 2:16:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jitz wrote:
>

>
> Lastly, anyone have a sense for the difference between the ATI 9600, 9700,
> and 9800? They all have 128 M of ram, but not sure the differences.

Assuming you're talking about Radeon Mobility 9x00, Anandtech has a good
article on the new RM9800 at
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2171

Lisa
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 2:24:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> | > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
> | > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
> | > | Jason Cothran wrote:
> | > |
> | > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
> | > |
> | > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
> | > |
> | >
> | > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that computer
> | > illiterate.
> | He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
> | you're so "literate"!
>
> Ok, by simply stating I prefer my A64, I am trying to write a benchmark
> suite? Weird.

Weird? That's the point - you aren't trying to and you HAVEN'T, while
he HAS. Even more to the point, I doubt that you CAN. Yet more to the
point, the question is not whether you prefer you A64 or not (I see no
preference or discussion of that in the quote above!), but whether you
have the ability to formulate a preference in a way that will be
respected by others who are literate in the ways of computers.

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 2:30:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

P.T. Breuer wrote:

> He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
> you're so "literate"!

Mr Moesl didn't "wrote" (in terms of programming) a benchmark suite, he just
tests the performance of several programs he uses. That's all. And hardly
writing a benchmark suite...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 2:38:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

aladin wrote:

> Hey Benjamin, thanks again for the advice, its been REALLY helpful. I
> took the plunge and bought just now.

Congratulations.

> I decided not to worry about the
> P4 vs AMD. I bought a 3.2 P4 with hyperthreading. I decided against
> the 3.4 b/c it was $150 dollars more. Its a rip off if you think about
> it, i mean its only .2 faster.

Yes, it really is a rip off. You won't notice the difference between 3.2 and
3.4, so 150$ is quite steep.

> It should be here in about 2 weeks, so
> it will be fun to set up. Anyway, here are the specs.
>
> Operating System Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Home Edition
> Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3.20 GHz w/HT Technology
> Display 17.0" WVA WSXGA+ BrightView (1680x1050)
> Graphics Card 128MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(TM) FX Go5700
> Memory 1.0GB DDR SDRAM (2x512MB)
> Hard Drive 80 GB 5400 RPM Hard Drive

Sounds good, especially since they are not using the 4200rpm sleeping tablet
disk drives any more. Depending on Your applications, You eventually might
want to upgrade to a 7200rpm drive later which should be very easy.

> Primary CD/DVD Drive 2X DVD+RW/R & CD-RW Combo Drive

Well, DVD burner is nice but the mobile burners have a somewhat bad
reputation when it comes to reliability. They are quite sensible on the
media You use, so if You experience problems try to change the media.

That's btw not a HP-specific problem. These burners are OEM units made by
Toshiba, LG and others, and they are used in other notebook brands as well.

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 2:53:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Benjamin Gawert <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote:
> P.T. Breuer wrote:
>
> > He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
> > you're so "literate"!
>
> Mr Moesl didn't "wrote" (in terms of programming) a benchmark suite, he just
> tests the performance of several programs he uses. That's all. And hardly
> writing a benchmark suite...

It's exactly "writing a benchmark suite".

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 5:43:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

P.T. Breuer wrote:

>> Mr Moesl didn't "wrote" (in terms of programming) a benchmark suite,
>> he just tests the performance of several programs he uses. That's
>> all. And hardly writing a benchmark suite...
>
> It's exactly "writing a benchmark suite".

No, it's not. "Writing a benchmark suite" means sitting down, thinking about
what I want to benchmark, the criteria and necessary environments, the APIs
I want to use, and then hacking this into code in Your prefered programming
language.

Just installing the applications I use is _not_ "writing a benchmark suite",
it's nothing more than installing and seeing how it performs. This can be
done by everyone that is able to click on "setup.exe" in Windows. But
_writing_ a benchmark suite needs deep knowledge about the platform and the
interfaces.

BTW: Moesl's "benchmark" is even more worthless since he never mentions
_what_ applications he uses. The term "content creation" goes very far,
covering everything from DTP, picture processing over web site creation,
flash programming to video editing and animations. All these fields have
very different performance requirements for CPU, I/O and gfx. Mr Moesl
doesn't tell us _what_ he understands as "content creation" (I suspect he
limits it to web site creation), he doesn't tell us _which_ applications he
uses, _how_ they are configured, _how_ the system is configured and any
other details that heavily impact performance. Everyone who has at least
some basic knowledge about performance evaluation techniques knows that
without knowing the test parameters the results are simply worthless.

If I would I could do the same. I "write" the "BGSBS Benjamin Gawert Super
Benchmark Suite" and compare two computers with it. If it's enough for You
if I write that due to my benchmark suite System A has a double
"BGSBS-Stone" value than System B it's fine. But in the end it says nothing,
because You don't know _what_ and _how_ I benchmark. It can be the overall
system performance, it can be heavy gfx stuff, but it also could be simply
that when dropping both from the 7th floor window of a building System A
hits the street first.

Benchmarking is a very complicated thing. It's not just installing a program
and reading some numbers. You have to know exactly _what_ the benchmark does
and all the circumventing details (i.e. system configuration etc). A gfx
benchmark like 3Dmark for example says nothing about the system performance
when running a database. Reliable Benchmarking can't be done by everyone but
requires people that know what they are doing. And from all what Mr Moesl
gave to public here and especially in the german notebook group I really
doubt he belongs to these people.

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 31, 2004 8:46:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:jjc1hc.i73.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
| > news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > | > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
| > | > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
| > | > | Jason Cothran wrote:
| > | > |
| > | > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
| > | > |
| > | > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that
computer
| > | > illiterate.
| > | He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
| > | you're so "literate"!
| >
| > Ok, by simply stating I prefer my A64, I am trying to write a benchmark
| > suite? Weird.
|
| Weird? That's the point - you aren't trying to and you HAVEN'T, while
| he HAS. Even more to the point, I doubt that you CAN. Yet more to the
| point, the question is not whether you prefer you A64 or not (I see no
| preference or discussion of that in the quote above!), but whether you
| have the ability to formulate a preference in a way that will be
| respected by others who are literate in the ways of computers.
|


You are obviously confusing me with someone else. I have no clue as to what
you are talking about I haven't, he has and can't. I simply said I prefer
the A64. As far as computer literacy, I would gladly put my experience and
knowledge against yours any day. I am sorry it upsets you that I prefer an
A64 to a P4 or P-m, but guess what, it's an opinion. I am entitled to it.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 6:34:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> news:jjc1hc.i73.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> | > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> | > news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> | > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> | > | > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
> | > | > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
> | > | > | Jason Cothran wrote:
> | > | > |
> | > | > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
> | > | >
> | > | > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that computer
> | > | > illiterate.
> | > | He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
> | > | you're so "literate"!
> | >
> | > Ok, by simply stating I prefer my A64, I am trying to write a benchmark
> | > suite? Weird.
> |
> | Weird? That's the point - you aren't trying to and you HAVEN'T, while
> | he HAS. Even more to the point, I doubt that you CAN. Yet more to the
> | point, the question is not whether you prefer you A64 or not (I see no
> | preference or discussion of that in the quote above!), but whether you
> | have the ability to formulate a preference in a way that will be
> | respected by others who are literate in the ways of computers.
>
> You are obviously confusing me with someone else.

I have no idea who you are, and therefore I am not confusing you with
anyone else on those grounds alone. Moreover, as you can see from the
quotes above, you are the person I addressed originally, in response to
your assertion "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate". And
you are the person who I have responded to at every stage of the further
conversation since.

Therefore I conclude that not only am I not confusing you with anyone
else, but you are exactly the usenet identity that I think you are, and
the identity that I intend to address.

Why do you doubt it?


> I have no clue as to what
> you are talking about I haven't,

I am talking about what you said.

> he has and can't. I simply said I prefer

You said what is quoted above and which I chose to challenge,
namely:

"Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"

Whatever else you said I am not interested in, and I have not
challenged, nor mentioned.

> the A64. As far as computer literacy, I would gladly put my experience and
> knowledge against yours any day.

Then you would lose. Look me up in google.

> I am sorry it upsets you that I prefer an
> A64 to a P4 or P-m, but guess what, it's an opinion. I am entitled to it.

It upsets me not at all. I care not one whit what you prefer. What I
care about is that you slander someone with the words:

"Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"

when that someone is a very competent, capable and knowledgeable person
(IMNSHO). What you have done is called "mud slinging" and is
despicable.

I further opine that he is almost certainly much more capable and
knwledgable than you, based on the high probability that you have not
written a benchmark suite for testing computers, and that he has. I
offered that reasoning, and you have not chosen to challenge it,
therefore I submit that the charge is admitted and conceded.


Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 6:34:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:ef53hc.o22.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
| > news:jjc1hc.i73.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > | > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
| > | > news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| > | > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > | > | > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
| > | > | > | Jason Cothran wrote:
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing
with...
| > | > | >
| > | > | > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be
that computer
| > | > | > illiterate.
| > | > | He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite,
since
| > | > | you're so "literate"!
| > | >
| > | > Ok, by simply stating I prefer my A64, I am trying to write a
benchmark
| > | > suite? Weird.
| > |
| > | Weird? That's the point - you aren't trying to and you HAVEN'T, while
| > | he HAS. Even more to the point, I doubt that you CAN. Yet more to the
| > | point, the question is not whether you prefer you A64 or not (I see no
| > | preference or discussion of that in the quote above!), but whether you
| > | have the ability to formulate a preference in a way that will be
| > | respected by others who are literate in the ways of computers.
| >
| > You are obviously confusing me with someone else.
|
| I have no idea who you are, and therefore I am not confusing you with
| anyone else on those grounds alone. Moreover, as you can see from the
| quotes above, you are the person I addressed originally, in response to
| your assertion "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate". And
| you are the person who I have responded to at every stage of the further
| conversation since.
|
| Therefore I conclude that not only am I not confusing you with anyone
| else, but you are exactly the usenet identity that I think you are, and
| the identity that I intend to address.
|
| Why do you doubt it?

Primarily because you have been making obscure, false statements.

|
|
| > I have no clue as to what
| > you are talking about I haven't,
|
| I am talking about what you said.

I said I'll stick with my Athlon 64 and got slammed? I am sorry you don't
like my preference for ultimate performance

|
| > he has and can't. I simply said I prefer
|
| You said what is quoted above and which I chose to challenge,
| namely:
|
| "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"
|
| Whatever else you said I am not interested in, and I have not
| challenged, nor mentioned.

All you quoted was "I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook". This has
nothing to do with whatever meaningless benchmarks you are rattling about

|
| > the A64. As far as computer literacy, I would gladly put my experience
and
| > knowledge against yours any day.
|
| Then you would lose. Look me up in google.

No need to look you up in google. Google will tell me nothing.

|
| > I am sorry it upsets you that I prefer an
| > A64 to a P4 or P-m, but guess what, it's an opinion. I am entitled to
it.
|
| It upsets me not at all. I care not one whit what you prefer. What I
| care about is that you slander someone with the words:
|
| "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"
|
| when that someone is a very competent, capable and knowledgeable person
| (IMNSHO). What you have done is called "mud slinging" and is
| despicable.

Ok, then quote the part of the post you are referring to instead of clipping
it.

|
| I further opine that he is almost certainly much more capable and
| knwledgable than you, based on the high probability that you have not
| written a benchmark suite for testing computers, and that he has. I
| offered that reasoning, and you have not chosen to challenge it,
| therefore I submit that the charge is admitted and conceded.
|

You are welcome to your conclusion. I will not argue that you think he is
more capable, nor have I. I have no desire to write a benchmarking suite. My
concern is in real world performance. The only gripe I have with the person
you are defending is the he calls a 35W processor a desktop chip. I f he
wants to write a benchmarking suite, more power to him. I concentrate my
efforts on other applications.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 7:26:38 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Benjamin Gawert <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote:
> P.T. Breuer wrote:
>
> >> Mr Moesl didn't "wrote" (in terms of programming) a benchmark suite,
> >> he just tests the performance of several programs he uses. That's
> >> all. And hardly writing a benchmark suite...
> >
> > It's exactly "writing a benchmark suite".
>
> No, it's not. "Writing a benchmark suite" means sitting down, thinking about
> what I want to benchmark, the criteria and necessary environments, the APIs
> I want to use, and then hacking this into code in Your prefered programming
> language.

That's what he has done.

> _writing_ a benchmark suite needs deep knowledge about the platform and the
> interfaces.

No it doesn't. As evidenced by any number of benchmark suites.

> BTW: Moesl's "benchmark" is even more worthless since he never mentions
> _what_ applications he uses.

Is it repeatable and testable? Ask him for the program that does the
testing, and see if you get the same results.


> The term "content creation" goes very far,
> covering everything from DTP, picture processing over web site creation,
> flash programming to video editing and animations. All these fields have
> very different performance requirements for CPU, I/O and gfx.

Quite probably, but I imagine they all have large data cache requirements
and relatively small programming cache requirements. Anyway, you can
check - ask him for the benchmark suite.


> Mr Moesl
> doesn't tell us _what_ he understands as "content creation" (I suspect he

It doesn't matter what he or you understands by the term, so long as
you too can run the measurement and you can measure the contribution of
the items you are interested in. Ask away at him. I believe he'll tell
you!


> limits it to web site creation), he doesn't tell us _which_ applications he
> uses

Ask him.

> _how_ they are configured, _how_ the system is configured and any

How the system is configured is hard to imagine as a contributer. Are
you suggesting that he has set the bus speed low, or something? These
are portables! Not much is configurable in the bios. Nothing
significant that I can think of, except maye caching, and that would be
obvious.

> other details that heavily impact performance. Everyone who has at least
> some basic knowledge about performance evaluation techniques knows that
> without knowing the test parameters the results are simply worthless.

Indeed, but I believe the test parameters do not vary and are not varied.
He simply runs a set test. So you can run the same test and get the
same answer.

> If I would I could do the same. I "write" the "BGSBS Benjamin Gawert Super
> Benchmark Suite"

Fine. Go ahead!

> and compare two computers with it. If it's enough for You

That is great. But you actually have to go ahead and DO it. That is
what I sugested Herr Moesl has done, and the OP had not.

> if I write that due to my benchmark suite System A has a double
> "BGSBS-Stone" value than System B it's fine. But in the end it says nothing,

Benchmarks say nothing in particular in general. They are merely
informative.


> because You don't know _what_ and _how_ I benchmark. It can be the overall
> system performance, it can be heavy gfx stuff, but it also could be simply
> that when dropping both from the 7th floor window of a building System A
> hits the street first.

It could be. Is it? Produce your benchmark and we shall see. The point
is that Moesl has a benchmark!

> Benchmarking is a very complicated thing. It's not just installing a program

No it is not complicated.

> and reading some numbers. You have to know exactly _what_ the benchmark does

No you don't. Indeed, you hardly ever do!

> and all the circumventing details (i.e. system configuration etc). A gfx
> benchmark like 3Dmark for example says nothing about the system performance
> when running a database. Reliable Benchmarking can't be done by everyone but

It certainly can.

> requires people that know what they are doing.

No, it just requires normal people, who exercise an ordinary amount of
care and attention in their experimental procedure.


> And from all what Mr Moesl
> gave to public here and especially in the german notebook group I really
> doubt he belongs to these people.

OTOH, I have little doubt that he does, from the evidence, and my
opinion in liklihood is rather more expert than yours in this matter.

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 7:46:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> news:ef53hc.o22.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> | > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> | > news:jjc1hc.i73.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> | > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> | > | > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> | > | > news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> | > | > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> | > | > | > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
> | > | > | > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
> | > | > | > | Jason Cothran wrote:
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing with...
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that computer
> | > | > | > illiterate.
> | > | > | He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
> | > | > | you're so "literate"!

[ snip ]

> | > You are obviously confusing me with someone else.

[ snip ]

> | Therefore I conclude that not only am I not confusing you with anyone
> | else, but you are exactly the usenet identity that I think you are, and
> | the identity that I intend to address.
> |
> | Why do you doubt it?
>
> Primarily because you have been making obscure, false statements.

What? Nothing I have said is obscure, and everything is quoted with the
correct context. If you have a PARTICULAR comprehension problem with
anything in PARTICULAR, then ask about it. I see nothing above that
could possibly be regarded as obscure. What is it that you see as
obscure?

> | You said what is quoted above and which I chose to challenge,
> | namely:
> |
> | "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"
> |
> | Whatever else you said I am not interested in, and I have not
> | challenged, nor mentioned.
>
> All you quoted was "I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook".


It is not ALL I quoted, but it was quoted, as a lead in to the thread.
However, it is not what I commented on! You can see my comment and its
context, just as they appear above, here:

> LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that computer
> illiterate.
He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
you're so "literate"!

> This has
> nothing to do with whatever meaningless benchmarks you are rattling about

It certainly does - his opinion is based on the results of his
benchmarks, i.e., his scientific tests. Your opinion is based on
nothing of the kind. His opinion is based on a verifiable and
repudiable and repeatable experiment, yours is not. Therefore his
opinion carries weight, and yours does not. If you wish to contest his
opinion you must attack his experiment or his experimetal procedure,
and you have done nothing of the kind, therefore "you lose". In
particular, you are not entitled to call him "illiterate", when it is
evidently you that are the illiterate in such matters, as evidenced by
your form (or lack of form) of argument.


> | > the A64. As far as computer literacy, I would gladly put my experience
> and
> | > knowledge against yours any day.
> |
> | Then you would lose. Look me up in google.
>
> No need to look you up in google. Google will tell me nothing.

Google is a data repository. If you choose not to use it, what do you
prefer to use? The scientific citations index?

> | > I am sorry it upsets you that I prefer an
> | > A64 to a P4 or P-m, but guess what, it's an opinion. I am entitled to
> it.
> |
> | It upsets me not at all. I care not one whit what you prefer. What I
> | care about is that you slander someone with the words:
> |
> | "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"
> |
> | when that someone is a very competent, capable and knowledgeable person
> | (IMNSHO). What you have done is called "mud slinging" and is
> | despicable.
>
> Ok, then quote the part of the post you are referring to instead of clipping
> it.

I quoted and commented on precisely the part of the post that I
intended to. As I have done in every single reply.


> | I further opine that he is almost certainly much more capable and
> | knwledgable than you, based on the high probability that you have not
> | written a benchmark suite for testing computers, and that he has. I
> | offered that reasoning, and you have not chosen to challenge it,
> | therefore I submit that the charge is admitted and conceded.

> You are welcome to your conclusion. I will not argue that you think he is
> more capable, nor have I. I have no desire to write a benchmarking suite. My
> concern is in real world performance.

And how do you think you will measure it?

Case over.


> The only gripe I have with the person
> you are defending is the he calls a 35W processor a desktop chip. I f he

I would agree with him. I have whole-room lightbulbs that use half as
much power as that! Indeed, less than a third as much power.

> wants to write a benchmarking suite, more power to him. I concentrate my
> efforts on other applications.

Such as what? Benchmarking is hardly difficult! Run one.

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 7:46:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:ml93hc.sf7.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
| > news:ef53hc.o22.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > | > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
| > | > news:jjc1hc.i73.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| > | > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > | > | > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:7hj0hc.ueo.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| > | > | > | Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > | > | > | > "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
| > | > | > | > news:2phpisFkm3ttU1@uni-berlin.de...
| > | > | > | > | Jason Cothran wrote:
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | As I said, ignore him. He's really not worth discussing
with...
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't
be that computer
| > | > | > | > illiterate.
| > | > | > | He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite,
since
| > | > | > | you're so "literate"!
|
| [ snip ]
|
| > | > You are obviously confusing me with someone else.
|
| [ snip ]
|
| > | Therefore I conclude that not only am I not confusing you with anyone
| > | else, but you are exactly the usenet identity that I think you are,
and
| > | the identity that I intend to address.
| > |
| > | Why do you doubt it?
| >
| > Primarily because you have been making obscure, false statements.
|
| What? Nothing I have said is obscure, and everything is quoted with the
| correct context. If you have a PARTICULAR comprehension problem with
| anything in PARTICULAR, then ask about it. I see nothing above that
| could possibly be regarded as obscure. What is it that you see as
| obscure?
|
| > | You said what is quoted above and which I chose to challenge,
| > | namely:
| > |
| > | "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"
| > |
| > | Whatever else you said I am not interested in, and I have not
| > | challenged, nor mentioned.
| >
| > All you quoted was "I'll stick with my silent A64 notebook".
|
|
| It is not ALL I quoted, but it was quoted, as a lead in to the thread.
| However, it is not what I commented on! You can see my comment and its
| context, just as they appear above, here:
|
| > LOL, true. I guess he is just trolling. Certainly he can't be that
computer
| > illiterate.
| He's not, you are. YOU try writing a computer benchmark suite, since
| you're so "literate"!
|
| > This has
| > nothing to do with whatever meaningless benchmarks you are rattling
about
|
| It certainly does - his opinion is based on the results of his
| benchmarks, i.e., his scientific tests. Your opinion is based on
| nothing of the kind. His opinion is based on a verifiable and
| repudiable and repeatable experiment, yours is not. Therefore his
| opinion carries weight, and yours does not. If you wish to contest his
| opinion you must attack his experiment or his experimetal procedure,
| and you have done nothing of the kind, therefore "you lose". In
| particular, you are not entitled to call him "illiterate", when it is
| evidently you that are the illiterate in such matters, as evidenced by
| your form (or lack of form) of argument.
|
|
| > | > the A64. As far as computer literacy, I would gladly put my
experience
| > and
| > | > knowledge against yours any day.
| > |
| > | Then you would lose. Look me up in google.
| >
| > No need to look you up in google. Google will tell me nothing.
|
| Google is a data repository. If you choose not to use it, what do you
| prefer to use? The scientific citations index?
|
| > | > I am sorry it upsets you that I prefer an
| > | > A64 to a P4 or P-m, but guess what, it's an opinion. I am entitled
to
| > it.
| > |
| > | It upsets me not at all. I care not one whit what you prefer. What I
| > | care about is that you slander someone with the words:
| > |
| > | "Certainly he can't be that computer illiterate"
| > |
| > | when that someone is a very competent, capable and knowledgeable
person
| > | (IMNSHO). What you have done is called "mud slinging" and is
| > | despicable.
| >
| > Ok, then quote the part of the post you are referring to instead of
clipping
| > it.
|
| I quoted and commented on precisely the part of the post that I
| intended to. As I have done in every single reply.
|
|
| > | I further opine that he is almost certainly much more capable and
| > | knwledgable than you, based on the high probability that you have not
| > | written a benchmark suite for testing computers, and that he has. I
| > | offered that reasoning, and you have not chosen to challenge it,
| > | therefore I submit that the charge is admitted and conceded.
|
| > You are welcome to your conclusion. I will not argue that you think he
is
| > more capable, nor have I. I have no desire to write a benchmarking
suite. My
| > concern is in real world performance.
|
| And how do you think you will measure it?
|
| Case over.
|
|
| > The only gripe I have with the person
| > you are defending is the he calls a 35W processor a desktop chip. I f he
|
| I would agree with him. I have whole-room lightbulbs that use half as
| much power as that! Indeed, less than a third as much power.
|
| > wants to write a benchmarking suite, more power to him. I concentrate my
| > efforts on other applications.
|
| Such as what? Benchmarking is hardly difficult! Run one.
|
| Peter

I just briefly scanned that post, as I can only assume it is full of the
same nonsense your preceding posts were full of, but if you choose to agree
that a chip dissipating 35w is not suitable for a laptop, that is your
prerogative. Some of us need the performance offered by the extra power,
even if it is at the expense of having a battery last only 4 hours compared
to 5-5.5 . If battery life is your only concern, by all means, the Dothan is
your best choice. I am sorry to have gotten you so riled up with the facts.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 8:35:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> I just briefly scanned that post, as I can only assume it is full of the
> same nonsense your preceding posts were full of,

Such as? The only thing I have said in earlier posts is that Herr
Moesl's opinion is valid, since it is based on testing and measurement,
and that anyone who calls a person illiterate for following scientific
procedure had better take it back, and apply the term to themselves ...

> but if you choose to agree
> that a chip dissipating 35w is not suitable for a laptop, that is your

I certainly agree.

> prerogative. Some of us need the performance offered by the extra power,

Good. Then it appears you are willing to sacrifice reliability,
operability, portability, independence, and so on, on the alter of
"extra power" (why not "better algorithms"?). And that you prefer to
use a chip that uses a lot of power all the time to do what you need
sometimes instead of a chip that uses less power almost all the time.

It sounds daffy to me, but I imagine that the reason you are prepared to
suffer in this way is the lower cost of the less suitable chip. Is that
it?

> even if it is at the expense of having a battery last only 4 hours compared
> to 5-5.5

It will be two hours instead of four, if it is twice the power
consumption. And I preume it is three times.

> If battery life is your only concern,

It certainly is one of the important ones in a laptop! If it weren't,
you'd get a desktop instead, since you could be attached to a wall
outlet. And you'd also burn yourself trying to hold a 35W lightbulb in
your lap. Try it :-).

> by all means, the Dothan is
> your best choice. I am sorry to have gotten you so riled up with the facts.

I'm not riled up - indeed, I don't even care what your opinion on the
fcats is. What I care about is that a person (Herr Moesl) is called
"illiterate" for possessing a scientific procedure and test from which
his judgments are developed, and the capacity to back up his oopinions
with logical argument. That seems highly literate to me! Indeed, it is
more than "seems", it IS.

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 2:48:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

P.T. Breuer wrote:

>> No, it's not. "Writing a benchmark suite" means sitting down,
>> thinking about what I want to benchmark, the criteria and necessary
>> environments, the APIs I want to use, and then hacking this into
>> code in Your prefered programming language.
>
> That's what he has done.

No, he didn't. He just used some standard applications from a single genre
and compares the computers need for certain tasks...

His knowledge definitely wouldn't be enough for that. As I said I know his
postings for several years from the german notebook group, and he often
enough presented himself as totally illiterate to computer technology (for
example, he told us that for 3D games the intel Extreme 2 shared memory gfx
would be more than 3x as fast as a Geforce 3 which is totally BS).

On his website he states that students with noisy notebooks get stupid
because of the noise which results in less income. Or that the DOT.COM
bubble only bursted because the manager couldn't think right because of
noisy computers, and that with the use of silent computers this never would
have happend. And he really believes that intel itself uses his webiste to
learn about "future trends"...

Honestly, I'm not sure if You're not trolling or if You don't know better,
but if You can read German You should have a look on his website and on the
postings he made in de.comp.sys.notebooks, and You certainly will
understand.

>> _writing_ a benchmark suite needs deep knowledge about the platform
>> and the interfaces.
>
> No it doesn't. As evidenced by any number of benchmark suites.

You seem to be one of the people that blindly follow any benchmark numbers
without reflecting where they come from. Fine, that's Your decision, but
please don't expect everyone to do the same. Most people prefer to think
about what they spend money for. If I would do that I certainly would have
been fired long ago...

>> BTW: Moesl's "benchmark" is even more worthless since he never
>> mentions _what_ applications he uses.
>
> Is it repeatable and testable? Ask him for the program that does the
> testing, and see if you get the same results.

First, he has been asked several times on _what_ his benchmark tests and
_how_. He _never_ gave details but only said that this are his applications.
Commercial applications that he can't just pass to anyone since they are
payware. Besides that, it isn't worth bothering because content creation
usually is one of the lighter tasks that don't do heavy CPU load and even
less gfx load, especially in terms of web content creation...

>> Mr Moesl
>> doesn't tell us _what_ he understands as "content creation" (I
>> suspect he
>
> It doesn't matter what he or you understands by the term, so long as
> you too can run the measurement and you can measure the contribution
> of the items you are interested in. Ask away at him. I believe he'll
> tell you!

No, he won't, as he hasn't told _anyone_ that asked him the last years.

>> _how_ they are configured, _how_ the system is configured and any
>
> How the system is configured is hard to imagine as a contributer. Are
> you suggesting that he has set the bus speed low, or something? These
> are portables! Not much is configurable in the bios. Nothing
> significant that I can think of, except maye caching, and that would
> be obvious.

Well, You show a good example of why benchmarking needs some specialist. The
configuration is indeed very important and has a great impact on
performance. Beginning with certain BIOS settings (less a problem in brand
name units with sparse BIOS, but more in cheaper notebooks with lots of
settings), and going to OS configuration. What settings are used for the
gfx? Any background tasks involved? Is networking disabled? The CPU load
different NICs apply differs with type and drivers. What powermanagement
settings have been applied? Release of every driver used? And so on...

There are lots of factors a normal user doesn't think of that affects
performance. That's why for a reliable benchmark You need someone that knows
what he does...

> Indeed, but I believe the test parameters do not vary and are not
> varied.

Yes, You believe. You don't know. As easily recogniseable by his website and
his postings, Moesl has a very strong attitude against desktop CPUs. So he
isn't really neutral. And from someone with such attutudes You _believe_ the
tests haven't been altered?

> He simply runs a set test. So you can run the same test and
> get the
> same answer.

Well, no. Even standard OS installations differ with driver revisions and
other parameters, so just testing and comparing them doesn't give You
reliable values. Again an example why the person that does the test has to
know what he does...

>> If I would I could do the same. I "write" the "BGSBS Benjamin Gawert
>> Super Benchmark Suite"
>
> Fine. Go ahead!
>
>> and compare two computers with it. If it's enough for You
>
> That is great. But you actually have to go ahead and DO it. That is
> what I sugested Herr Moesl has done, and the OP had not.
>
>> if I write that due to my benchmark suite System A has a double
>> "BGSBS-Stone" value than System B it's fine. But in the end it says
>> nothing,
>
> Benchmarks say nothing in particular in general. They are merely
> informative.

That depends. Common benchmarks like 3Dmark etc don't say much about
real-world performance (even in games). But there are benchmarks that do.

>> because You don't know _what_ and _how_ I benchmark. It can be the
>> overall system performance, it can be heavy gfx stuff, but it also
>> could be simply that when dropping both from the 7th floor window of
>> a building System A hits the street first.
>
> It could be. Is it? Produce your benchmark and we shall see. The point
> is that Moesl has a benchmark!

Well, I did that already. Part of my job is system evaluation. That means
every time we want to spend a bunch of money on new Supercomputers we have
to test several computers (not PCs, usually bigger irons like HP Superdome
and the big IBM pSeries) for its real world performance on certain
applications which are mostly written by ourselves. We use our own code that
uses _exactly_ the same functions that the planned application does. We end
up with tons of numbers, from which all have to be interpreted. It's not
just comparing numbers against numbers, You have to know how the number was
gatered and what functions have been used.

From my over ten years in this job I know that reliable benchmarking only
can be done with intimate system and application knowledge. It might be fine
for most home users and PC kiddies to read that the new Radeon XXX has much
more 3Dmark points than the GF xxxx and thus must be better, totally
ignoring what and how has been tested. But that's as reliable as reading in
fish innards and barely professional benchmarking.

>> and reading some numbers. You have to know exactly _what_ the
>> benchmark does
>
> No you don't. Indeed, you hardly ever do!

Yes, I do. If I don't know how the numbers have been gathered they are
worthless...

>> and all the circumventing details (i.e. system configuration etc). A
>> gfx benchmark like 3Dmark for example says nothing about the system
>> performance when running a database. Reliable Benchmarking can't be
>> done by everyone but
>
> It certainly can.

No, it can't.

>> requires people that know what they are doing.
>
> No, it just requires normal people, who exercise an ordinary amount of
> care and attention in their experimental procedure.

Definitely no.

>> And from all what Mr Moesl
>> gave to public here and especially in the german notebook group I
>> really doubt he belongs to these people.
>
> OTOH, I have little doubt that he does, from the evidence, and my
> opinion in liklihood is rather more expert than yours in this matter.

Sure. You obviously are the real benchmark expert ;-) Somehow I have the
feeling that asking You for Your experience in this field is useless.

Believe what You want, and feel free to blindly follow any numbers Mr Moesl
gave You. But don't expect the same beavior from everyone...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 3:40:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Benjamin Gawert <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote:
> P.T. Breuer wrote:
>
> >> No, it's not. "Writing a benchmark suite" means sitting down,
> >> thinking about what I want to benchmark, the criteria and necessary
> >> environments, the APIs I want to use, and then hacking this into
> >> code in Your prefered programming language.
> >
> > That's what he has done.
>
> No, he didn't.

Yes he did - AFAIK he has his own application which he uses/sells for
his business and he tests new laptops against this application.

> He just used some standard applications from a single genre
> and compares the computers need for certain tasks...

I see no evidence of that - instead I see him constructing a benchmark
test that matches his intended application domain, and applying it.

> His knowledge definitely wouldn't be enough for that. As I said I know his
> postings for several years from the german notebook group, and he often

I have seen his postings for many years here, and they are always
reasonable.

> enough presented himself as totally illiterate to computer technology (for
> example, he told us that for 3D games the intel Extreme 2 shared memory gfx
> would be more than 3x as fast as a Geforce 3 which is totally BS).

That's not illiterate - indeed, it's quite understandable, since I
presume neither he nor I care about such things (I am perfectly happy
with any graphics card made by matrox, and have been for ten years -
I do not use graphics except for seeing what I type!). As far as I am
concerned, whatever silly claims graphics cards makers make is sheer
bullshit anyway, since all I want is something that renders as fast as
I type and stays stable while it does so.


> On his website he states that students with noisy notebooks get stupid
> because of the noise which results in less income.

That's just burlesque humour. It's amusing.


> Or that the DOT.COM
> bubble only bursted because the manager couldn't think right because of
> noisy computers, and that with the use of silent computers this never would
> have happend.

More humour.

> And he really believes that intel itself uses his webiste to
> learn about "future trends"...

He doesn't believe so, but I presume he can see intel entries in his
httpd logs.

> Honestly, I'm not sure if You're not trolling or if You don't know better,
> but if You can read German You should have a look on his website and on the
> postings he made in de.comp.sys.notebooks, and You certainly will
> understand.

I understand fine - I see only reasonable conclusions that any logical
person who knows about cpu architectures would come to. Indeed, the P4
is designed to go as fast as possible without any optimization, and the
only motive I can see is to get higher clock numbers and hence gull
the gullible. You could argue that it's a return to risc approaches, of
do it simple but do it fast, but that's just silly in a laptop, where
you want to do it slow (many instructions per cycle, lower cycle rate),
in order to lower consumption. Essentially a laptop is an embedded
computing device, rather like your telephone, and the logic of
low-power design and remote computation should prevail.



> >> _writing_ a benchmark suite needs deep knowledge about the platform
> >> and the interfaces.
> >
> > No it doesn't. As evidenced by any number of benchmark suites.
>
> You seem to be one of the people that blindly follow any benchmark numbers

On the contrary, I take no notice of them whatsoever, except perhaps to
determine pertinent facts like the bus width, speed, cache size,
number, arrangement, and so on.

> without reflecting where they come from. Fine, that's Your decision, but
> please don't expect everyone to do the same. Most people prefer to think
> about what they spend money for. If I would do that I certainly would have

Indeed - I spend money on a laptop in order to have a portable
environment on which I can type and visualize what I type and which I
can use for connectivity. "Can I get this into starbucks for 4 hours"
is about the best basic test I can think of. "Can I take this to
singapore and type for half the flight" is a more advanced test.
Another test is "will this stay in one piece for three years".

That's the point. You can't do any of that with the P4-based models,
since they are constructed on the cheap, benefiting from the lower cost
of the non-mobile chips for the descktop market. The lower prices put
them in a constructors bracket where they also compete on price
componentwise, which makes it pretty certain that the extra heat
dissipation (light-bulb wattages!) is doing damage to components that
can't take it for long. The extra heat also makes te constructon
larger, to accomodate the larger cooling systems and freater disipative
area required, which means that the guy in front on the aeroplane will
squash your screen with his seatback, even if you managed to squeeze
the monster onto the tray table.

And then there's all that heat, which will make it imposible to hold in
your lap at airports.


> been fired long ago...
>
> >> BTW: Moesl's "benchmark" is even more worthless since he never
> >> mentions _what_ applications he uses.
> >
> > Is it repeatable and testable? Ask him for the program that does the
> > testing, and see if you get the same results.
>
> First, he has been asked several times on _what_ his benchmark tests and
> _how_. He _never_ gave details but only said that this are his applications.

There you are.

> Commercial applications that he can't just pass to anyone since they are
> payware.

Fair enough.

> Besides that, it isn't worth bothering because content creation
> usually is one of the lighter tasks that don't do heavy CPU load and even
> less gfx load, especially in terms of web content creation...

That's fine then - that matches what I would expect an ordinary cpu to
be doing 99% of the time.


> >> Mr Moesl
> >> doesn't tell us _what_ he understands as "content creation" (I
> >> suspect he
> >
> > It doesn't matter what he or you understands by the term, so long as
> > you too can run the measurement and you can measure the contribution
> > of the items you are interested in. Ask away at him. I believe he'll
> > tell you!
>
> No, he won't, as he hasn't told _anyone_ that asked him the last years.

Get the details of the test in terms of his commercial application, and
then decide if you want to buy the app in order to carry out the test.
But I don't think you will find any surprises, since his conclusions
are perfectly non-surprising!


>
> >> _how_ they are configured, _how_ the system is configured and any
> >
> > How the system is configured is hard to imagine as a contributer. Are
> > you suggesting that he has set the bus speed low, or something? These
> > are portables! Not much is configurable in the bios. Nothing
> > significant that I can think of, except maye caching, and that would
> > be obvious.
>
> Well, You show a good example of why benchmarking needs some specialist. The
> configuration is indeed very important and has a great impact on

No it isn't, because it can't be changed.


> performance. Beginning with certain BIOS settings (less a problem in brand

There aren't any to change.

> name units with sparse BIOS, but more in cheaper notebooks with lots of
> settings),

In ten years of computing on laptps, I have never seen a bios setting
in a laptop that had any significance.


> and going to OS configuration. What settings are used for the
> gfx?

Who cares! Why would I care about graphics? I use whatever the driver I
use uses.


> Any background tasks involved?

Of course not.

> Is networking disabled?

Why should it be? Networking is not involved in running the benchmarks
I am interested in! If I were interested in the networking speed, I
would simply measure it, but I am more likely to be interested in the
power dissipation of the NIC.

> The CPU load
> different NICs apply differs with type and drivers.

No recent NIC leaves any significant work to the driver (days of ne2k's
are long past!). But if I were interested in NIC efficiency I would
measure it.


> What powermanagement
> settings have been applied? Release of every driver used? And so on...

Whatever I like - so long as I don't apply any limiting values it's
irrelevant.

> There are lots of factors a normal user doesn't think of that affects
> performance. That's why for a reliable benchmark You need someone that knows

I am afraid all the ones you have mentioned are completely obvious or
irrelevant,

> what he does...

No you don't. You need an ordinary human being. Not a subnornal.

> > Indeed, but I believe the test parameters do not vary and are not
> > varied.
>
> Yes, You believe. You don't know.

I believe it on the basis that I have never seen anything significant
to vary in laptop bioses. What i would normally vary are things like
cache refresh rates and regimes, none of which can be controlled in
laptop bioes.


> As easily recogniseable by his website and
> his postings, Moesl has a very strong attitude against desktop CPUs. So he

And a quite justified one. Does it matter?


> isn't really neutral. And from someone with such attutudes You _believe_ the
> tests haven't been altered?

Indeed, because they accord with what one would expect. A P3
architecture will be as fast under normal circumstances as a much
higher clocked P4, for example, and this is simply a consequence of the
design. It is hardly a surprise therefore to see that kind of
measurement confirmed by his tests. Some of the more surprising things
he reports are measurements of amd versus pentium machines, and that
IS of interest, and I for one would like to see an explanation.

> > He simply runs a set test. So you can run the same test and
> > get the
> > same answer.
>
> Well, no. Even standard OS installations differ with driver revisions and
> other parameters, so just testing and comparing them doesn't give You


Fine - he always says what the o/s is, afair.

> reliable values. Again an example why the person that does the test has to
> know what he does...

Will you stop beating this dead horse? ANyone with scientific training
nows how to set up and document an experiment properly. You were
taught how in high school. It doesn't require any particular skill,
just accuracy and honesty and meticulousness. _ordinary_ people do it
quite well.

> >> If I would I could do the same. I "write" the "BGSBS Benjamin Gawert
> >> Super Benchmark Suite"
> >
> > Fine. Go ahead!
> >
> >> and compare two computers with it. If it's enough for You
> >
> > That is great. But you actually have to go ahead and DO it. That is
> > what I sugested Herr Moesl has done, and the OP had not.
> >
> >> if I write that due to my benchmark suite System A has a double
> >> "BGSBS-Stone" value than System B it's fine. But in the end it says
> >> nothing,
> >
> > Benchmarks say nothing in particular in general. They are merely
> > informative.
>
> That depends. Common benchmarks like 3Dmark etc don't say much about
> real-world performance (even in games). But there are benchmarks that do.

They try and match their load to the intended domain of use. That is
what Herr Moesl has done.

>
> > It could be. Is it? Produce your benchmark and we shall see. The point
> > is that Moesl has a benchmark!
>
> Well, I did that already. Part of my job is system evaluation. That means
> every time we want to spend a bunch of money on new Supercomputers we have
> to test several computers (not PCs, usually bigger irons like HP Superdome
> and the big IBM pSeries) for its real world performance on certain
> applications which are mostly written by ourselves. We use our own code that
> uses _exactly_ the same functions that the planned application does. We end

That's just the same methodology as Herr Moesl is using.

> up with tons of numbers, from which all have to be interpreted. It's not
> just comparing numbers against numbers, You have to know how the number was
> gatered and what functions have been used.

Well, one might argue that if your numbers require interpretation the
tests are not measuring directly what they were intended to measure.
Incidentally, I would regard the quality of the code produced by
compilers for that platform as a factor in the purchase, so I would
definitely not test the same machine code (if it were possible) but
instead recompile for the target platform. One can factor out the
compiler contribution if it is of interest.

>
> From my over ten years in this job I know that reliable benchmarking only
> can be done with intimate system and application knowledge. It might be fine

On the contrary, it requires only general knowledge about computing,
and yes, knowledge of the application domain. But then Herr Moesl has
that, since he is testing HIS applications.

> for most home users and PC kiddies to read that the new Radeon XXX has much
> more 3Dmark points than the GF xxxx and thus must be better, totally

Who cares! I really don't see the point of such things - are they all
playing 3D games or something, and thus need ultrafast 3D rendering
engines? Or are they walking around with a virtual realityy headset on?
And who is to say that their games designer is exercising the card
functionality in the same average way that the benchmark is?

> ignoring what and how has been tested. But that's as reliable as reading in
> fish innards and barely professional benchmarking.
>
> >> and reading some numbers. You have to know exactly _what_ the
> >> benchmark does
> >
> > No you don't. Indeed, you hardly ever do!
>
> Yes, I do. If I don't know how the numbers have been gathered they are
> worthless...

You do not know which machine instructions are issued. Evidently you
are not a compiler writer - I am.

> >> and all the circumventing details (i.e. system configuration etc). A
> >> gfx benchmark like 3Dmark for example says nothing about the system
> >> performance when running a database. Reliable Benchmarking can't be
> >> done by everyone but
> >
> > It certainly can.
>
> No, it can't.

Yes it can. It requires no special skills. Just ordinary scientific
techniques.

> >> requires people that know what they are doing.
> >
> > No, it just requires normal people, who exercise an ordinary amount of
> > care and attention in their experimental procedure.
>
> Definitely no.

Definitely yes. Or do you think that the lab technician assigned to do
the test cares or knows what he is testing?

> >> And from all what Mr Moesl
> >> gave to public here and especially in the german notebook group I
> >> really doubt he belongs to these people.
> >
> > OTOH, I have little doubt that he does, from the evidence, and my
> > opinion in liklihood is rather more expert than yours in this matter.
>
> Sure. You obviously are the real benchmark expert ;-) Somehow I have the
> feeling that asking You for Your experience in this field is useless.

Try again, boyo. It isn't a "field", in the same way as
cigarette-carton-opening is not a field.

> Believe what You want, and feel free to blindly follow any numbers Mr Moesl

I do not blindly follow anything. But the numbers he produces are the
result of real experiments, and as such deserve the respect due to a
person who gets off his backside and does the objective testing work
himself. When you produce your numbers, I'll be glad to look at them.

> gave You. But don't expect the same beavior from everyone...

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 5:29:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

P.T. Breuer wrote:

> Yes he did - AFAIK he has his own application which he uses/sells for
> his business and he tests new laptops against this application.

He does web design, that's all. And he uses standard applications. He
doesn't write anything at all, and the only "programming" he can do is some
basic html...

>> He just used some standard applications from a single genre
>> and compares the computers need for certain tasks...
>
> I see no evidence of that

Then please get informed by reading the german newsgroups or finding someone
that translates them for You. He itself stated often enough that he tests
the applications he uses, and that for him these applications are only
important.

> - instead I see him constructing a benchmark
> test that matches his intended application domain, and applying it.

That requires knowledge he doesn't have.

> I have seen his postings for many years here, and they are always
> reasonable.

Maybe for You it's reasonable fighting a war against desktop CPUs, for
people that have to use computers in a somehwat professional manner it's
not.

>> enough presented himself as totally illiterate to computer
>> technology (for example, he told us that for 3D games the intel
>> Extreme 2 shared memory gfx would be more than 3x as fast as a
>> Geforce 3 which is totally BS).
>
> That's not illiterate - indeed, it's quite understandable, since I
> presume neither he nor I care about such things

He simply doesn't know any better. But still talks about things he doesn't
know or understand, and (probably the worst) gives others that are looking
for help false informations.

> (I am perfectly happy
> with any graphics card made by matrox, and have been for ten years -
> I do not use graphics except for seeing what I type!).

Fine. Now do You try to convince the world that Your Matrox is the best
solution and that only Your personal requirements decide what's good or not
for everyone? Moesl does.

> As far as I am
> concerned, whatever silly claims graphics cards makers make is sheer
> bullshit anyway, since all I want is something that renders as fast as
> I type and stays stable while it does so.

Exactly, all _You_ want. But when someone asks me what performs better in
games I'm not supposed to tell him that this doesn't matter because all I
want is that it displays something.

>> On his website he states that students with noisy notebooks get
>> stupid because of the noise which results in less income.
>
> That's just burlesque humour. It's amusing.

No, he really thinks that way. No humor. He takes this really serious.
Again, read what he wrote in the german newsgroup.

>> Or that the DOT.COM
>> bubble only bursted because the manager couldn't think right because
>> of noisy computers, and that with the use of silent computers this
>> never would have happend.
>
> More humour.

Definitely not.

>> And he really believes that intel itself uses his webiste to
>> learn about "future trends"...
>
> He doesn't believe so,

Well, he does, as he often enough stated.

> I understand fine - I see only reasonable conclusions that any logical
> person who knows about cpu architectures would come to. Indeed, the P4
> is designed to go as fast as possible without any optimization, and
> the only motive I can see is to get higher clock numbers and hence
> gull the gullible. You could argue that it's a return to risc
> approaches, of do it simple but do it fast, but that's just silly in
> a laptop, where you want to do it slow (many instructions per cycle,
> lower cycle rate), in order to lower consumption.

Again, these are _Your_ preferences. Other people have other requirements to
a laptop.

> Essentially a
> laptop is an embedded computing device, rather like your telephone,
> and the logic of low-power design and remote computation should
> prevail.

Definitely not for everyone.

>> You seem to be one of the people that blindly follow any benchmark
>> numbers
>
> On the contrary, I take no notice of them whatsoever, except perhaps
> to determine pertinent facts like the bus width, speed, cache size,
> number, arrangement, and so on.

Fine, but that's just a small part of what decides performance...

> Indeed - I spend money on a laptop in order to have a portable
> environment on which I can type and visualize what I type and which I
> can use for connectivity. "Can I get this into starbucks for 4 hours"
> is about the best basic test I can think of. "Can I take this to
> singapore and type for half the flight" is a more advanced test.
> Another test is "will this stay in one piece for three years".

Again, these are Your preferences. Maybe You should learn to accept that
these are not valid for every notebook user...

> That's the point. You can't do any of that with the P4-based models,
> since they are constructed on the cheap,

Such generalisations are complete BS. There are enough high end notebooks
which are P4-based...

> benefiting from the lower
> cost of the non-mobile chips for the descktop market.

Again, get informed. Not every P4-based system is made for low cost, and not
every P4-based notebook uses desktop chipsets (I'm typing this on my old IBM
A31 which is P4-based and has mobile chipsets)...

> The lower
> prices put them in a constructors bracket where they also compete on
> price componentwise, which makes it pretty certain that the extra heat
> dissipation (light-bulb wattages!) is doing damage to components that
> can't take it for long. The extra heat also makes te constructon
> larger, to accomodate the larger cooling systems and freater
> disipative area required, which means that the guy in front on the
> aeroplane will squash your screen with his seatback, even if you
> managed to squeeze the monster onto the tray table.

Maybe You should have a look at the professional market, too. You seem to
know only a few consumer notebooks which are hardly representative for all..

> And then there's all that heat, which will make it imposible to hold
> in your lap at airports.

Well, my P4-based IBM A31 for example gets less hot than the P-M-based T41p
I had...

Generalizations are mostly false...

>> Besides that, it isn't worth bothering because content creation
>> usually is one of the lighter tasks that don't do heavy CPU load and
>> even less gfx load, especially in terms of web content creation...
>
> That's fine then - that matches what I would expect an ordinary cpu to
> be doing 99% of the time.

Yes, fine. And what relevance does a benchmark with mostly idling CPUs have
for someone who wants to do video encoding? Or Gaming? Or CAD? Exactly,
absolutely zero, as for all application that forces the CPU and/or gfx
heavily.

>> performance. Beginning with certain BIOS settings (less a problem in
>> brand
>
> There aren't any to change.

So YOu don't know many notebooks. Lots of Gericoms for example have almost
as much BIOS settings as a standard desktop PC.

> In ten years of computing on laptps, I have never seen a bios setting
> in a laptop that had any significance.

Then You haven't seen much.

>> and going to OS configuration. What settings are used for the
>> gfx?
>
> Who cares! Why would I care about graphics? I use whatever the driver
> I use uses.

Again, that's valid for You. But no-one cares about what _You_ prefer when
someone else does something different. If You don't care about gfx You can't
know how much influence the driver version has on performance.

You and Mr Moesl obiously share the the same limited and egocentric view.
But Your requirements aren't necessarily the one of other people.

>> Any background tasks involved?
>
> Of course not.

How can You know that? Have You been attended when Moesl did his
"benchmarks"?

>> Is networking disabled?
>
> Why should it be? Networking is not involved in running the benchmarks
> I am interested in! If I were interested in the networking speed, I
> would simply measure it, but I am more likely to be interested in the
> power dissipation of the NIC.
>
>> The CPU load
>> different NICs apply differs with type and drivers.
>
> No recent NIC leaves any significant work to the driver (days of
> ne2k's are long past!).

Again, wrong. For example, the current RealTek NICs cause a very high CPU
load simply because the chip itself is very simple, and a lot of functions
have to be done by the driver in software.

> But if I were interested in NIC efficiency I
> would measure it.

Sure, but that's not the point. The point is that networking causes CPU load
that makes Your "content creation benchmark" results incorrect.

>> What powermanagement
>> settings have been applied? Release of every driver used? And so
>> on...
>
> Whatever I like - so long as I don't apply any limiting values it's
> irrelevant.

No, it's not. Maybe You should get informed about Speedstep and PowerNow and
how they work.

>> Yes, You believe. You don't know.
>
> I believe it on the basis that I have never seen anything significant
> to vary in laptop bioses. What i would normally vary are things like
> cache refresh rates and regimes, none of which can be controlled in
> laptop bioes.

Well, it seems You don't have seen much notebook BIOSes, and You obviously
don't know anything about the impact of drivers or network load. All part of
parameters that alter performance a lot.

>> As easily recogniseable by his website and
>> his postings, Moesl has a very strong attitude against desktop CPUs.
>> So he
>
> And a quite justified one. Does it matter?

If recommendations are based on personal attitudes than on facts, yes, it
matters. If false informations are used to hide the lack of knowledge, then
yes, it matters.

>> Well, no. Even standard OS installations differ with driver
>> revisions and other parameters, so just testing and comparing them
>> doesn't give You
>
>
> Fine - he always says what the o/s is, afair.

Yes, hardly enough to make the results worthwile.

> Will you stop beating this dead horse? ANyone with scientific
> training nows how to set up and document an experiment properly. You
> were taught how in high school. It doesn't require any particular
> skill, just accuracy and honesty and meticulousness. _ordinary_
> people do it quite well.

It _does_ require knowledge, as Mr Moesl and Your statements (resp. the lack
of knowledge about what impacts system performance) clearly shows.

>> Well, I did that already. Part of my job is system evaluation. That
>> means every time we want to spend a bunch of money on new
>> Supercomputers we have to test several computers (not PCs, usually
>> bigger irons like HP Superdome and the big IBM pSeries) for its real
>> world performance on certain applications which are mostly written
>> by ourselves. We use our own code that uses _exactly_ the same
>> functions that the planned application does. We end
>
> That's just the same methodology as Herr Moesl is using.

Again, wrong. He just throws some standard programs on computers in
undefined state, measures the time and compares the value. Our benchmarking
is much more deep, consisting of multiple parts. We have defined test
parameters, and we know about the system we are testing.

>> up with tons of numbers, from which all have to be interpreted. It's
>> not just comparing numbers against numbers, You have to know how the
>> number was gatered and what functions have been used.
>
> Well, one might argue that if your numbers require interpretation the
> tests are not measuring directly what they were intended to measure.

No, it just means that You have to understand where the numbers come from
and how they were gathered. A high Rpeak for example doesn't mean the system
has a high I/O performance. Understanding the numbers is very important...

> Incidentally, I would regard the quality of the code produced by
> compilers for that platform as a factor in the purchase, so I would
> definitely not test the same machine code (if it were possible) but
> instead recompile for the target platform. One can factor out the
> compiler contribution if it is of interest.

Well, in the highend sector You usually use the best compiler for a certain
platform (which usually is not gcc). We optimize the code as much as
possible for every target platform, so we indeed get the most reliable
results.

>> From my over ten years in this job I know that reliable benchmarking
>> only can be done with intimate system and application knowledge. It
>> might be fine
>
> On the contrary, it requires only general knowledge about computing,

which Mr. Moesl doesn't have.

>> for most home users and PC kiddies to read that the new Radeon XXX
>> has much more 3Dmark points than the GF xxxx and thus must be
>> better, totally
>
> Who cares! I really don't see the point of such things - are they all
> playing 3D games or something, and thus need ultrafast 3D rendering
> engines? Or are they walking around with a virtual realityy headset
> on?

Who knows? There are enough people that game on a notebook. And there are
enough people doing heavy 3D (CAD, Animations, Visualizing) on a notebook as
well. Just because _You_ don't do it or can't imagine that someone does
doesn't mean that other people don't use a notebook for more than typing and
surfing.

> And who is to say that their games designer is exercising the card
> functionality in the same average way that the benchmark is?

That's why 3Dmark and Co are quite irrelevant to gaming performance.

> You do not know which machine instructions are issued. Evidently you
> are not a compiler writer - I am.

For a compiler writer You know very little about drivers and such.

> Definitely yes. Or do you think that the lab technician assigned to do
> the test cares or knows what he is testing?

If the assistant doesn't have the knowledge he for sure gets his
instructions from someone who has.

> I do not blindly follow anything. But the numbers he produces are the
> result of real experiments, and as such deserve the respect due to a
> person who gets off his backside and does the objective testing work
> himself. When you produce your numbers, I'll be glad to look at them.

Well, I don't think You'll get a security clearance for that ;-)

I think continuing this discussion is obviously useless. As I said You're
free to believe what You want, but don't expect others to follow You
example. And even if it might hard for You to realize (as it is for Moesl),
the world isn't turning around You. Other people do have other requirements
when it comes to computers, so what's good for You isn't necessarily good
for others. I'd recommend for You to get to work in a team environment which
is the best way to learn to consider the requirements of others instead of
concentrating on Your own, limited world.

EOD

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 8:58:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:ihc3hc.qnh.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > I just briefly scanned that post, as I can only assume it is full of the
| > same nonsense your preceding posts were full of,
|
| Such as? The only thing I have said in earlier posts is that Herr
| Moesl's opinion is valid, since it is based on testing and measurement,
| and that anyone who calls a person illiterate for following scientific
| procedure had better take it back, and apply the term to themselves ...
|
| > but if you choose to agree
| > that a chip dissipating 35w is not suitable for a laptop, that is your
|
| I certainly agree.
|
| > prerogative. Some of us need the performance offered by the extra power,
|
| Good. Then it appears you are willing to sacrifice reliability,
| operability, portability, independence, and so on, on the alter of
| "extra power" (why not "better algorithms"?). And that you prefer to
| use a chip that uses a lot of power all the time to do what you need
| sometimes instead of a chip that uses less power almost all the time.

No I prefer to use a chip that uses a little bit more power and gives me a
lot more performance with no stability issues. I am sacrificing 0
reliability, portability, or independence.

|
| It sounds daffy to me, but I imagine that the reason you are prepared to
| suffer in this way is the lower cost of the less suitable chip. Is that
| it?

I don't suffer from using a more powerful chip, more suitable chip The A64
is more suitable to my needs.

|
| > even if it is at the expense of having a battery last only 4 hours
compared
| > to 5-5.5
|
| It will be two hours instead of four, if it is twice the power
| consumption. And I preume it is three times.

It is quite obvious you don't own one. The longest I have use dit on battery
is a tick over three hours, and still had over 25% battery left.

|
| > If battery life is your only concern,
|
| It certainly is one of the important ones in a laptop! If it weren't,
| you'd get a desktop instead, since you could be attached to a wall
| outlet. And you'd also burn yourself trying to hold a 35W lightbulb in
| your lap. Try it :-).

Certainly it is a concern, that is why I bought a notebook that uses only a
35W processor.

|
| > by all means, the Dothan is
| > your best choice. I am sorry to have gotten you so riled up with the
facts.
|
| I'm not riled up - indeed, I don't even care what your opinion on the
| fcats is. What I care about is that a person (Herr Moesl) is called
| "illiterate" for possessing a scientific procedure and test from which
| his judgments are developed, and the capacity to back up his oopinions
| with logical argument. That seems highly literate to me! Indeed, it is
| more than "seems", it IS.
|

You are entitled to your opinions.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 1, 2004 9:00:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:2plq46Fmev68U1@uni-berlin.de...

The best thing to do is add these trolls to kill file like most others have.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 2, 2004 6:36:37 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran wrote:

> The best thing to do is add these trolls to kill file like most
> others have.

Why? Especially Moesl can be very funny when he tells about his "vacations"
which (from his own reports!) usually seem to be like this:

http://notebook.pege.org/2000/moderner-arbeitsstil.htm

The best way is just to simply ignore them...

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 2, 2004 8:09:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
> [ ptb ]
> | Good. Then it appears you are willing to sacrifice reliability,
> | operability, portability, independence, and so on, on the alter of
> | "extra power" (why not "better algorithms"?). And that you prefer to
> | use a chip that uses a lot of power all the time to do what you need
> | sometimes instead of a chip that uses less power almost all the time.
>
> No I prefer to use a chip that uses a little bit more power and gives me a
> lot more performance with no stability issues. I am sacrificing 0

Uh, if you are talking about an amd 64 bit chip it uses a LOT more
power. But I'd love to have a 64 bit chip to try and develop on - I
wouldn't want it in a laptop, however! There's no point - I can log in
from the laptop to a 64 bit desktop.

> reliability, portability, or independence.

You most certainly are! How can you possibly think you aren't?

> I don't suffer from using a more powerful chip, more suitable chip The A64
> is more suitable to my needs.

If you are prepared to sacrifice reliability, portability, and
independence for that, fine - that's your judgment, for you.


> | It will be two hours instead of four, if it is twice the power
> | consumption. And I preume it is three times.
>
> It is quite obvious you don't own one. The longest I have use dit on battery
> is a tick over three hours, and still had over 25% battery left.

Then you didn't use it at 100% cpu for that time, which begs the
question of why you needed it. But I'm impressed by three hours! I
don't think I can get much more than three hours on my TP X24.

> | It certainly is one of the important ones in a laptop! If it weren't,
> | you'd get a desktop instead, since you could be attached to a wall
> | outlet. And you'd also burn yourself trying to hold a 35W lightbulb in
> | your lap. Try it :-).
>
> Certainly it is a concern, that is why I bought a notebook that uses only a
> 35W processor.

Only! I think our scales are different. I'd be concerned by using as
much as 10W !! Perhaps if you thought of your portable as a sort of
glorified mobile telephone, you'd see the disadvantage.


> | I'm not riled up - indeed, I don't even care what your opinion on the
> | fcats is. What I care about is that a person (Herr Moesl) is called
> | "illiterate" for possessing a scientific procedure and test from which
> | his judgments are developed, and the capacity to back up his oopinions
> | with logical argument. That seems highly literate to me! Indeed, it is
> | more than "seems", it IS.

> You are entitled to your opinions.

As are you. But my opinions are based on reasoning that I am prepared
to explain, and Herr Moesl's are based on measurements that he is
prepared to present. In both cases, that gives them a value in terms of
intellectual currency that is not present in a huffy "I am entitled to
my opinion".

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 2, 2004 8:34:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:qcv5hc.dop.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
| Jason Cothran <reply@board.nomail> wrote:
| > [ ptb ]
| > | Good. Then it appears you are willing to sacrifice reliability,
| > | operability, portability, independence, and so on, on the alter of
| > | "extra power" (why not "better algorithms"?). And that you prefer to
| > | use a chip that uses a lot of power all the time to do what you need
| > | sometimes instead of a chip that uses less power almost all the time.
| >
| > No I prefer to use a chip that uses a little bit more power and gives me
a
| > lot more performance with no stability issues. I am sacrificing 0
|
| Uh, if you are talking about an amd 64 bit chip it uses a LOT more
| power. But I'd love to have a 64 bit chip to try and develop on - I
| wouldn't want it in a laptop, however! There's no point - I can log in
| from the laptop to a 64 bit desktop.

It uses 35W

|
| > reliability, portability, or independence.
|
| You most certainly are! How can you possibly think you aren't?

More importantly, how can you think I am?

|
| > I don't suffer from using a more powerful chip, more suitable chip The
A64
| > is more suitable to my needs.
|
| If you are prepared to sacrifice reliability, portability, and
| independence for that, fine - that's your judgment, for you.

If i was prepared to sacrifice anything, I would be using a celeron or some
other POS Intel chip.

|
|
| > | It will be two hours instead of four, if it is twice the power
| > | consumption. And I preume it is three times.
| >
| > It is quite obvious you don't own one. The longest I have use dit on
battery
| > is a tick over three hours, and still had over 25% battery left.
|
| Then you didn't use it at 100% cpu for that time, which begs the
| question of why you needed it. But I'm impressed by three hours! I
| don't think I can get much more than three hours on my TP X24.

Actually I did. I have the procesoor speed locked at full speed, even on
battery.

|
| > | It certainly is one of the important ones in a laptop! If it weren't,
| > | you'd get a desktop instead, since you could be attached to a wall
| > | outlet. And you'd also burn yourself trying to hold a 35W lightbulb in
| > | your lap. Try it :-).
| >
| > Certainly it is a concern, that is why I bought a notebook that uses
only a
| > 35W processor.
|
| Only! I think our scales are different. I'd be concerned by using as
| much as 10W !! Perhaps if you thought of your portable as a sort of
| glorified mobile telephone, you'd see the disadvantage.

What are you using that is only 10W Dothan is 21W

|
|
| > | I'm not riled up - indeed, I don't even care what your opinion on the
| > | fcats is. What I care about is that a person (Herr Moesl) is called
| > | "illiterate" for possessing a scientific procedure and test from which
| > | his judgments are developed, and the capacity to back up his oopinions
| > | with logical argument. That seems highly literate to me! Indeed, it
is
| > | more than "seems", it IS.
|
| > You are entitled to your opinions.
|
| As are you. But my opinions are based on reasoning that I am prepared
| to explain, and Herr Moesl's are based on measurements that he is
| prepared to present. In both cases, that gives them a value in terms of
| intellectual currency that is not present in a huffy "I am entitled to
| my opinion".
|

As have I.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 3, 2004 10:48:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> His knowledge definitely wouldn't be enough for that. As I said I know his
> postings for several years from the german notebook group, and he often
> enough presented himself as totally illiterate to computer technology (for
> example, he told us that for 3D games the intel Extreme 2 shared memory
gfx
> would be more than 3x as fast as a Geforce 3 which is totally BS).

I tested with Aquamark 3 the Geforce card in an Acer 620 with
1 GHz mobile P3 Tualatin against Acer 662 with Intel shared memory.
The Intel shared memory was 3 times faster


--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
September 10, 2004 12:26:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Roland Mösl <founder@pege.org> wrote in
news:4137f9f8$0$7650$91cee783@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at:

>> His knowledge definitely wouldn't be enough for that. As I said I
>> know his postings for several years from the german notebook group,
>> and he often enough presented himself as totally illiterate to
>> computer technology (for example, he told us that for 3D games the
>> intel Extreme 2 shared memory
> gfx
>> would be more than 3x as fast as a Geforce 3 which is totally BS).
>
> I tested with Aquamark 3 the Geforce card in an Acer 620 with
> 1 GHz mobile P3 Tualatin against Acer 662 with Intel shared memory.
> The Intel shared memory was 3 times faster
>
>

Which Geforce card? The only 62x series acers I came across used the
Intel i830 with Intel dynamic mem. 8 to 32MB, I think.
This series had a slower cpu, older hardware and only a 133MHz System/mem
bus speed.

Compared to the much newer Centrino based 660 series, which came out
around the end of last year IIRC. This also used Intel dvmt (possibly up
to 64MB) but a newer chipset, faster cpu and 400MHz bus speed. I don't
recall what the mem speed was in these models e.g. PC2700 or 2100.

How about a more modern laptop e.g. for an Acer with the same cpu
something like the Aspire 2000 series, the 8000 series or one of the
Centrino 1.5 based folio models? Wouldn't that be a better comparison?
The same cpu, bus speed, chipset and possibly mem speed with the main
difference being the gpu used?


I mean nobodoy would be surprised if I tested, say a 2 year old graphics
card compared to a recent one only to find the new one was faster.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
September 10, 2004 9:57:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> >> His knowledge definitely wouldn't be enough for that. As I said I
> >> know his postings for several years from the german notebook group,
> >> and he often enough presented himself as totally illiterate to
> >> computer technology (for example, he told us that for 3D games the
> >> intel Extreme 2 shared memory
> > gfx
> >> would be more than 3x as fast as a Geforce 3 which is totally BS).
> >
> > I tested with Aquamark 3 the Geforce card in an Acer 620 with
> > 1 GHz mobile P3 Tualatin against Acer 662 with Intel shared memory.
> > The Intel shared memory was 3 times faster
> >
> >
>
> Which Geforce card? The only 62x series acers I came across used the
> Intel i830 with Intel dynamic mem. 8 to 32MB, I think.
> This series had a slower cpu, older hardware and only a 133MHz System/mem
> bus speed.

Yes, 133 MHz systembus as usual at mobile P3 Tualatin


> How about a more modern laptop e.g. for an Acer with the same cpu
> something like the Aspire 2000 series, the 8000 series or one of the
> Centrino 1.5 based folio models? Wouldn't that be a better comparison?
> The same cpu, bus speed, chipset and possibly mem speed with the main
> difference being the gpu used?

This was to show, that a modern shared memory graphic card is
about 3 times faster than a 3 years old graphic card with own memory


--
Roland Mösl - http://www.pege.org - http://notebook.pege.org
http://wds-internetwerbung.com Web Design startet an der Suchmaschine
!